BuzzerBeater Forums

As far as the status conferred by a prefix, here's an example for you: (88034.1). All in all, I'd be surprised if there's a "prefix effect", especially a positive one.

As far as the status conferred by a prefix, here's an example for you: (88034.1). All in all, I'd be surprised if there's a "prefix effect", especially a positive one.

Just my very personal observations, is all. Obviously I haven't read every post ever written on the forums, and I'm really not trying to sound like Jesse Ventura. My intention isn't to spawn conspiracy theories.
But this example you posted highlights the fact we're dealing with a behavioral issue. I mean, how in the world does a "rules" sticky get 2 and a half balls? It's a factual statement about the game rules. In all honesty, it shouldn't even be rated. Period.

I average a lofty three balls and am high on the list of total one-balls received - it goes both ways.

(145575.1)
I couldn't agree more. And that includes the light commentary on some navigational decisions after the change. Cheers.

But I don't agree with your theory that GM's, LA's or Mod's get some kind of special treatment. I got plenty of one ball posts to show for myself. And I gotta admit that, most of the ones I remember, were well deserved. But there are lots of peculiar examples out there with these folks.
By the way, does anyone else finds this talk about balls... awkward? LOL. Sorry, I really had to take this classic pun for a ride :P

Last edited by the L train at 6/3/2010 5:55:48 PM

But I don't agree with your theory that GM's, LA's or Mod's get some kind of special treatment. I got plenty of one ball posts to show for myself. And I gotta admit that, most of the ones I remember, were well deserved. But there are lots of peculiar examples out there with these folks.

Well, I wasn't really trying to insinuate that members that hold some sort of official title were getting preferential treatment, more so that maybe to some posters it triggered some sort of psychological reaction that if a GM or BB posted it, then it must be a quality post worthy of 5 balls, regardless of what the post actually said.

I see where you're trying to get at. Show examples where this function is misused to prove its the lack of objectivity and justify it's closure. Like I said, I couldn't agree more. But even not being part of the administration, I can tell you that they won't drop this eye-candy feature. Because, let's be honest, that's all it is. If they thought it was cool in the first place and invested time developing it, it will be hard for them to change their minds, since in my opinion this was a foreseeable side-effect. All you can do is contribute with your vote to what you think it's a badly evaluated post.

That being said, I hope you have better luck on getting the general navigation of the site polished. For example, there's no excuse for such great differences between the forums and the rest of the site. At the time, I was very critical about some decisions... But in the end, I have to confess that I thought we were lucky for getting to choose the version of the menu. I remember them saying that we'd eventually get used to some changes. They probably just wanted to deflect the fact that they didn't want to play with it anymore, because I haven't got used to this forum/site transitions. It's nothing short of clumsy.
Glad to have new blood discussing this issues on the forums. Cheers.

Last edited by the L train at 6/3/2010 7:54:42 PM

For those who don't want to see the post ratings, and who use Firefox, I just added hiding of the post rating system to my GreaseMonkey script. You can see more in Global at (145219.2).

I just added a new optional feature to the GreaseMonkey script to make everyone feel better about their bad ratings: (http://www.oeuftete.com/images/static/bb/tmp/everyone_is_...)